The developer behind the massive 10-tower waterfront Greenpoint Landing project on Friday broke ground on construction of the first three buildings in the complex, which will contain entirely below-market-rate units.

Neighbors say they are glad that the deep-pocketed developer will offer some units for less-than-luxury price tags, but are appalled that it is shoving some of the less-wealthy residents into their own buildings, instead of dispersing all the so-called “affordable” units amongst all the properties.

“You are going to know they are poor because of the door they go into,” said neighbor Helen Kersten, who has been a vocal opponent of both Greenpoint Landing and 77 Commercial Street, which is another smaller residential project planned nearby.

Developers Greenpoint Landing Associates and L and M Development Partners plan to open the first of the three below-market-rate buildings at 21 Commercial St. in about a year (it has been under construction for months, despite Friday’s official ground-breaking ceremony).

The second building at 33 Eagle St. will open in late 2016 and will include 98 units for between 40 percent and 120 percent of the area median income, which would include a three-person family that makes up to $93,240 a year. The third building at 5 Blue Slip, which will be a new address created for the complex, will include 103 units, which will go to families who bring in between $23,350 and $46,620 a year — 30 to 60 percent of the area median income.

The developers are being tight-lipped about the amenities for the segregated buildings, but you can guess how this is going to turn out:

The first three buildings will each have a gym and bike storage, and the developers say they have not yet decided if the buildings that also contain market-rate units will have the same amenities or fancier accoutrements, said a spokeswoman.

From the beginning, some Greenpoint residents complained that the development could contribute to rent spikes neighborhood-wide, clog the already limited transit, and further the negative environmental impact imposed by the polluted Newtown Creek site. “10,000 new people are not good for our community, on one of the most toxic waterways in America,” Greenpoint resident Darren Lipman told Bedford & Bowery at a Community Board 1 meeting in August 2013.

CB 1 opposed the project then, though it’s unclear whether the more recent commitment to affordable housing has changed public opinion (CB 1 has not yet responded to request for comment). At the very least, the transportation issue will likely remain long after the first few buildings debut—though developers say they’re hoping to install a ferry landing right by 5 Blue Slip, there’s only so much population an area served primarily by the limited G line can handle.

When pressed for comment about the strain on transit, Park Tower Group Vice President Johanna Greenbaum highlighted the East River Ferry, expanded B32 bus service, and improvements to the Kent Avenue bike lane in the neighborhood, and suggested that the impending addition of Citi Bike stations in Greenpoint would alleviate transit issues. “There’s a lot of biking and a lot of transportation alternatives that are coming,” she told us, though, still, adding a few extra cars to the G train might help, too.

Transportation issues aside, it remains to be seen whether these 1,400 affordable units will make enough of a dent in the city’s current housing crisis, or what impact the 4,100 market-share units will have on Greenpoint. The neighborhood’s landscape is certainly changing—though only about half the proposed buildings have been designed thus far, at least one tower will top 30 stories, with another boasting 40 stories, and condos will line a large swath of the waterfront. The project is expected to be completed within eight to 10 years.

No word from Levin about the pollution, rent concerns, or the construction of segregated buildings. He’s currently focused on waging war with Uber.

Comments

If no complete Bushwick inlet park then why are developers aloud to build? After all that was the Bloomberg deal park land, affordable housing for density. Bloomberg you look like a used car salesman with all your fake promises!

Where do all there people go in the next flood. Aviation High School evacuation center will not fit this new 20k plus additional people. All there towers are flood zone A, which was mandatory evac for Sandy.

Should GPL get tax breaks for the towers since there are no affordable units in them?

Why can’t they build the school in the towers and give us the school land for park?

Truth his crime is getting much worst in North Greenpoint, Subway is more crowded and find parking is now an achievement. And our councilman wants to reduce transportation options instead of increase them.

I just feel that there wouldn’t be a housing “crisis” if the city would just tax pied-a-terre properties and crack down on all the airbnb “hotels” in rent stabilized housing! What people do in their market rate units is one thing, but those fortunate to have a stabilized place who then use it for their own profit really need to be kicked out so that unit can be made available to someone who really needs to live in it. Also a voucher system for affordable housing would be so much better than this lottery system. It’s clunky as is to administer, disqualifies those whose income falls between the tight income brackets that are set in each lottery, disqualifies people who earn as little as $500 above or below a cut off, disqualifies those with too much in savings or retirement in spite of their current actual income, and I’ve even met someone who was denied because eight years prior he had a great job and was told that he had the potential to earn more when clearly a long time had gone by and he was unable to find the same kind of work again! I also know someone who got into an affordable building under one (lower) income and then the following year got a new job paying double…he’s still living there and paying the affordable rent. And let’s face it, as long as greed rules the rental market and incomes remain status quo in most areas, there will always be the need for reasonable rent, or “affordable housing” as we now like to call it.